COMPARE AND CONTRAST THE MEANING OF THE NATURAL LAW IN WRITINGS OF TWO OF THE FOLLOWING: HOBBES, LOCKE AND MONTESQUIEU. WHICH DO YOU FIND MORE CONVINCING AND WHY?

Authors Avatar

Budour Alanizy         Law, Politics & the state

W1122395                1SLC514

Compare and contrast the meaning of the Natural Law in writings of two of the following: Hobbes, Locke and Montesquieu. Which do you find more convincing and why?

I will be comparing meanings of Natural law in accordance to two thinkers.  I have chosen to use Thomas Hobbes (1651) and John Locke (1690).  I will start firstly by giving a rough idea or definition of what Natural Law is and then bring in the Greeks perspectives of Natural Law using thinkers such as Augustine, Aristotle and last but not least Thomas Aquinas.  After the introduction of the Greeks perspectives of Natural Law I will then be discussing Hobbes and Locke’s beliefs for this matter and finally comparing both Hobbes and Locke’s views.

Natural law theory is one of the most important theories in the philosophy of classical realism and is generally misinterpreted by many who dismissed it as a medieval relic.  The idea began with the ancient Greeks understanding of a universe governed in every particular by eternal unchangeable law in their distinction between what is just by nature and just by convention.  Natural law theory dates back to the time of the Greeks as I have mentioned earlier and great thinkers like Plato and Aristotle.  It is seen to be defined as the law which states that humans are in born with certain laws predetermined into them which allow them to determine the difference between right and wrong.  With Aristotle there is less reference to natural law than to the distinction between natural and conventional natural law where ‘natural’ meant harmony with reason.  He recognized the difference between things that were right or wrong in them and things that were merely right or wrong as means to other ends.

There are also leading explanations of natural law to be found in the writings of Thomas Aquinas; which contains the most comprehensive statement of Christian doctrine on natural law.  In addition to the fact, that it is perceived that Christian philosophers modified Stoic natural law theory categorizing natural law with the law of God. The Stoics believed that a positive law that violates natural is not true law which Aquinas is seen to agree to.

Aquinas distinguishes between four categories of law, eternal law, natural law, divine law and humanly posited law, his definition of natural law speaks of involvement of eternal law in rational beings.  In other words, since human beings are by nature rational beings it is morally appropriate that they should behave in a way that corresponds to their rational nature as a result Aquinas derives the moral law from the nature of human beings; therefore natural law.   The most important position adopted by Aquinas is that a law which fails to conform to natural or divine law is not a law at all, he did not make this statement but rather quoted Augustine “an unjust law is no law at all” suggesting that laws must be relatively just to be laws.  In other words a law which fails to be consistent with natural or divine law is not a law at all.  What is distinctive about Aquinas’ understanding of natural law is that it was neither exclusively juristic nor just a label for discussing natural order in human powers as well as he is not committed by his view that the basic principles of the natural law are obvious to asset that everyone has expressed these principles propositionally or that everything people say and believe about moral questions including moral principles is be found with them.  Finally Aquinas believes that laws which conflict with the needs of natural law lose their ownership to bind morally, in other words a government which abuses its authority by ratifying laws which are unjust surrenders it’s right to be obeyed as it lacks moral authority.  

Join now!

The first thinker I will be discussing is Thomas Hobbes.  Firstly Hobbes is identified with his saying that life is solitary, poor, brutish, and nasty and short which in a way gives us a background on his view of life.  He is seen to adopt a fairly authoritarian philosophy which places order above justice, in other words he suggests that people are compelled to obey the sovereign and have no option to remove him whatever they the people think of his actions and beliefs.  Hobbes' perspective of natural law is seen to be a teacher, as it teaches us ...

This is a preview of the whole essay